Welcome to the Inert Ordnance Collectors.
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17
  1. #11
    Premium Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Ontario / Canada
    Posts
    2,350
    Images
    43
    Thanks
    350
    Thanked 878 Times in 442 Posts
    Could my 60pr be of a similar vintage ? it only has the markings I show.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Gspragge For This Useful Post:

    MINENAZ16 (2nd September 2019)

  3. #12
    Ordnance Approved
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    FRANCE
    Posts
    2,238
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    2,211
    Thanked 1,821 Times in 827 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Gspragge View Post
    Could my 60pr be of a similar vintage ? it only has the markings I show.
    Could it be ww2 HE 60PR 56LB MKI ?
    I know ww1 60PR HE streamlined (until MKIXC), with same shape but with narrow band.
    http://www.bocn.co.uk/vbforum/thread...HE-info-needed
    Last edited by MINENAZ16; 2nd September 2019 at 08:43 AM.
    Any Live or Dug ordnance shown by me has been disposed of by EOD personnel .

  4. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Ballarat, Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    512
    Thanks
    416
    Thanked 192 Times in 99 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by MINENAZ16 View Post
    mk3d :

    Attachment 155207

    Darkman, note the difference of head with brass adapter on the diagram

    Thanks Minenaz16, I see what you mean. The Mk IIID nose has a brass fuze adapter, but on mine the fuze screws straight into the steel nose like the Mk IV. Possibly I have a mismatched round with the bottom part of the shell a Mk IIID and the nose section from a Mk IV. I just assumed they were matching as the shell is unfired, but anything's possible.
    Cheers, Graeme

  5. #14
    Premium Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Southern England
    Posts
    261
    Thanks
    205
    Thanked 116 Times in 48 Posts
    Hi all,

    Just to throw this into the mix if I may...
    The shell nose I have is identical to Darkman's in that it has no Brass adaptor for the fuse. It looks identical to MINENAZ16's drawing of the MkIV. The shell body has a narrow driving band too.
    I'm assuming this is the correct set up? What threw me off is that in the past I've seen a couple of examples with Brass adaptor sold as First war pieces? I'm hoping the head I have is correct before carrying out restoration and that this is a First war piece....
    (I'll post pictures in the next day or two).
    Cheers!

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to starshell For This Useful Post:

    Darkman (3rd September 2019)

  7. #15
    Ordnance Approved
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    FRANCE
    Posts
    2,238
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    2,211
    Thanked 1,821 Times in 827 Posts
    Herewith a picture of typical 60pr shrapnel found on ww1 battelfields (Mk1/Mk2 series and streamlined series without or with head brass adapter)

    60PR SHRAPNEL WW1.jpg
    Any Live or Dug ordnance shown by me has been disposed of by EOD personnel .

  8. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to MINENAZ16 For This Useful Post:

    Big Dave (3rd September 2019), DICKAREN (3rd September 2019), starshell (3rd September 2019)

  9. #16
    Premium Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,744
    Thanks
    500
    Thanked 1,084 Times in 613 Posts
    In relation to British projectiles, especially those manufactured during the Great War, it should be noted that the incorporation or omission of a fuze adapter/bush, does not necessarily mean a change of Mark. Many projectiles had an 'alternative head' that incorporated an adapter/bush and vice versa. Also, for many projectiles, an accepted repair method if it had failed examination due to defective fuze hole threads, was to cut the nose off and replace it with it new nose, that might appear to be an adapter/bush, but isn't.

    TimG

    RL Shell Drawings.pdf
    Last edited by TimG; 3rd September 2019 at 07:09 PM.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to TimG For This Useful Post:

    starshell (3rd September 2019)

  11. #17
    Premium Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Southern England
    Posts
    261
    Thanks
    205
    Thanked 116 Times in 48 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by TimG View Post
    In relation to British projectiles, especially those manufactured during the Great War, it should be noted that the incorporation or omission of a fuze adapter/bush, does not necessarily mean a change of Mark. Many projectiles had an 'alternative head' that incorporated an adapter/bush and vice versa. Also, for many projectiles, an accepted repair method if it had failed examination due to defective fuze hole threads, was to cut the nose off and replace it with it new nose, that might appear to be an adapter/bush, but isn't.

    TimG

    RL Shell Drawings.pdf
    Following on from TimG's post, I have 2 8" HE howitzer shells that are good examples of this; one has no Brass bushing, the other has. The drawings (copies) I have of the 8" HE show the fuze socket with no bushing as the 'alternative head'. Other than that both are identical.

 

 
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Back to top